|
342973039
|
0420600
|
2018-02-23
|
5010 CORTEZ AVE., TAMPA, FL, 33614
|
|
| Inspection Type |
Referral
|
| Scope |
Partial
|
| Safety/Health |
Safety
|
| Close Conference |
2018-02-23
|
| Emphasis |
L: FALL
|
| Case Closed |
2018-06-15
|
Related Activity
| Type |
Referral |
| Activity Nr |
1312705 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1297271 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1297310 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
Violation Items
| Citation ID |
01001 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 C01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-05-21 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-06-08 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
5691.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-06-14 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
2 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(c)(1): Supported scaffolds with a height to base width (including outrigger supports, if used) ratio of more than four to one (4:1) were not restrained from tipping by guying, tying, bracing, or equivalent means, as set forth in subparagraphs (i) - (iii) of this paragraph. A) At the construction site of the Services Operations Expansion Building of AND Services at 5010 Cortez Avenue in Tampa, FL, an employee working on a scaffold system suffered injuries when the scaffold tipped over and fell. The height of the scaffold system was approximately 19 feet and the base was 3.5 feet. the employer failed to restrain the scaffoldding system from tipping, on or about February 23, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 F03 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-05-21 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-06-08 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
5691.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-06-14 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
2 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(f)(3): Scaffolds and scaffold components were not inspected for visible defects by a competent person before each work shift, and after any occurrence which could affect a scaffold's structural integrity: A) At the construction site of the Services Operations Expansion Building of AND Services at 5010 Cortez Avenue in Tampa, FL, the employer failed to inspected the scaffold system to make sure was restrained from tipping, exposing employees to fall and struck-by hazards, on or about February 23, 2018. |
|
|
|
342958212
|
0420600
|
2018-02-20
|
101 N. GARDEN AVE, CLEARWATER, FL, 33756
|
|
| Inspection Type |
Referral
|
| Scope |
Partial
|
| Safety/Health |
Health
|
| Close Conference |
2018-02-20
|
| Emphasis |
L: HINOISE
|
| Case Closed |
2020-07-28
|
Related Activity
| Type |
Referral |
| Activity Nr |
1309375 |
| Health |
Yes |
|
Violation Items
| Citation ID |
01001 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19100095 C01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
3696.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
3696.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
3 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
5 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1910.95(c)(1): The employer did not administer a continuing, effective hearing conservation program as described in 29 CFR 1910.95(c) through (o) whenever employee noise exposures equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 decibels measured on the A scale, or equivalently a dose of fifty percent: a) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were not enrolled in a Hearing Conservation Program when exposed to continuous noise levels at 135.6% (92.2 dBA) of the permissible daily noise exposure (8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 90 dBA) during the 411 minute sampling period. Zero exposure was assumed for the 69 minute period not sampled. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. b) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were not enrolled in a Hearing Conservation Program when exposed to continuous noise levels at 132.7% (92.0 dBA) of the action level of noise exposure (8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA) during the 406 minute sampling period. Zero exposure was assumed for the 74 minute period not sampled. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. c) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were not enrolled in a Hearing Conservation Program when exposed to continuous noise levels at 116.8% (91.1 dBA) of the action level of noise exposure (8-hour time-weighted average sound level of 85 dBA) during the 395 minute sampling period. Zero exposure was assumed for the 85 minute period not sampled. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002A |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19100134 C01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
5174.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
5174.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use: a) While removing stucco from a brick building, the employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program which covered employees required to wear 3M half-faced respirators with combination cartridges or 3M filtering face piece device while exposed to silica. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002B |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19100134 E01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace: a) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees required to wear 3M half-faced respirators with combination cartridges or 3M filtering face piece device were not provided with a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002C |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19100134 F02 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator. a. While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were required to wear 3M half-faced respirators with combination cartridges or 3M filtering face piece device without having an appropriate fit test performed. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002D |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19100134 G01 I A |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
1 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A): Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function. a) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were allowed to have facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece on the 3M half-face dual cartridge respirator or 3M filtering face piece device and the face. This violation was observed on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002E |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19100134 K |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1910.134(k): The employer did not provide comprehensive, understandable training which did not occur annually and/or more often if necessary: a. While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were required to wear 3M half-faced respirators with combination cartridges or 3M filtering face piece device without having training provided. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01003A |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19261153 D01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
5174.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
5174.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
3 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(1): The employer did not ensure that employees were not exposed to an airborne concentration of respirable crystalline silica in excess of 50 ug/m3, calculated as an 8-hour TWA: a) While removing stucco from a brick building, an employee was exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica at an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) of 446.45 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) of air, which was 8.929 times the permissible exposure level (PEL) of 50.0 ug/m3. Sampling was performed for 229 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of 251 minutes. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. b) While removing stucco from a brick building, an employee was exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica at an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) of 206.43 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) of air, which was 4.129 times the permissible exposure level (PEL) of 50.0 ug/m3. Sampling was performed for 409 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of 71 minutes. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. c) While removing stucco from a brick building, an employee was exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica at an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) of 86.54 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) of air, which was 1.731 times the permissible exposure level (PEL) of 50.0 ug/m3. Sampling was performed for 161 minutes during one shift. Zero exposure was assumed for the unsampled period of 319 minutes. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01003B |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19261153 D02 III A |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)(iii)(A): The employer did not perform initial monitoring to assess the 8-hour TWA exposure for each employee on the basis of one or more personal breathing zone air samples that reflect the exposures of employees on each shift, for each job classification, in each work area: a) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica above the permissible exposure level (PEL) of 50.0 ug/m3, without the employer performing initial monitoring. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01003C |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19261153 G01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.1153(g)(1): The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan: a) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica above the permissible exposure level (PEL) of 50.0 ug/m3, without the employer having a written exposure control plan. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
01004 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19101200 E01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-08-09 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2018-09-26 |
| Current Penalty |
5174.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
5174.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-09-18 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met: (Construction Reference: 1926.59) a) While removing stucco from a brick building, employees were exposed to respirable dust containing crystalline silica above the permissible exposure level (PEL) of 50.0 ug/m3, without the employer having a written hazard communication program. This violation was discovered on or about February 20, 2018. |
|
|
|
342940954
|
0420600
|
2018-02-12
|
101 N GARDEN AVE., CLEARWATER, FL, 33756
|
|
| Inspection Type |
Complaint
|
| Scope |
Partial
|
| Safety/Health |
Safety
|
| Close Conference |
2018-02-12
|
| Emphasis |
L: FALL
|
| Case Closed |
2020-07-28
|
Related Activity
| Type |
Complaint |
| Activity Nr |
1307954 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
Violation Items
| Citation ID |
01001 |
| Citaton Type |
Repeat |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 B01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-05-01 |
| Current Penalty |
18108.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
18108.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-05-29 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(b)(1): Each platform on all working levels of scaffolds was not fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as specified in paragraphs 1926.451(b)(1)(i)-(ii) a) At the jobsite, employees in the process of removing stucco were exposed to fall hazards up to 20 feet, in that, work platforms on the 3rd and 4th levels of the scaffolding system were not fully planked or decked. Observed on or about 2/12/2018. TB Roofing & Construction was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard or its equivalent standard 29 CFR 1926.451(b)(1), which was contained in OSHA inspection number 1139208, citation number 1, item number 1A and was affirmed as a final order on 5/19/2016, with respect to a workplace located at 407 67th Street West, Bradenton, Florida. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002 |
| Citaton Type |
Repeat |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 G01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-05-01 |
| Current Penalty |
18108.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
18108.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-05-29 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Employees on scaffolds more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level by fall protection established in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)-(vii) of this section: a) At the jobsite, employees in the process of removing stucco were exposed to fall hazards up to 20 feet, in that, a guard rail was not installed at the open sides of the work platforms on the 3rd and 4th levels. Observed on or about 2/12/2018. TB Roofing & Construction was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard or its equivalent standard 29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1), which was contained in OSHA inspection number 1139208, citation number 1, item number 1B and was affirmed as a final order on 5/19/2016, with respect to a workplace located at 407 67th Street West, Bradenton, Florida. |
|
| Citation ID |
02001 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 C01 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-05-01 |
| Current Penalty |
9054.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
9054.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-05-29 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Related Event Code (REC) |
Complaint |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(c)(1): Supported scaffolds with a height to base width (including outrigger supports, if used) ratio of more than four to one (4:1) were not restrained from tipping by guying, tying, bracing, or equivalent means, as set forth in subparagraphs (i) - (iii) of this paragraph. a) At the jobsite, employees in the process of removing stucco were exposed to fall, collapse and struck by hazards, in that, the tubular welded frame scaffolding system (5' deep, 7' wide by 5' high) 5 levels high by 7 columns across was not restrained from tipping. Observed on or about 2/12/2018. |
|
| Citation ID |
02002 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260452 C02 |
| Issuance Date |
2018-05-01 |
| Current Penalty |
9054.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
9054.0 |
| Final Order |
2018-05-29 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
3 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.452(c)(2): Tubular welded frames and panels were not braced by cross, horizontal, or diagonal braces, or combination thereof, which would have secured vertical members together laterally: a) At the jobsite, employees in the process of removing stucco were exposed to fall, collapse and struck by hazards, in that, the tubular welded frame scaffolding system (5' deep, 7' wide by 5' high) 5 levels high by 7 columns across was missing cross bracing on the interior side 3rd column on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd levels. Observed on or about 2/12/2018. |
|
|
|
341962892
|
0419700
|
2016-12-08
|
8 SILK OAKES, ORMOND BEACH, FL, 32176
|
|
| Inspection Type |
Planned
|
| Scope |
NoInspection
|
| Safety/Health |
Safety
|
| Close Conference |
2016-12-08
|
| Emphasis |
L: FALL, P: FALL
|
| Case Closed |
2017-01-10
|
|
|
341392082
|
0420600
|
2016-04-07
|
407 67TH STREET WEST, BRADENTON, FL, 34209
|
|
| Inspection Type |
Planned
|
| Scope |
Complete
|
| Safety/Health |
Safety
|
| Close Conference |
2016-04-07
|
| Emphasis |
L: FALL, P: FALL
|
| Case Closed |
2016-09-19
|
Related Activity
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1139200 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1139126 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
Violation Items
| Citation ID |
01001A |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 B01 |
| Issuance Date |
2016-04-25 |
| Current Penalty |
3773.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
5390.0 |
| Final Order |
2016-05-19 |
| Nr Instances |
2 |
| Nr Exposed |
2 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(b)(1): Each platform on all working levels of scaffolds was not fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as specified in paragraphs 1926.451(b)(1)(i)-(ii) a. At the site, a two frame high tubular welded type scaffold had a 4 plank working platform exposing employees to a 13 feet fall hazard, on or about 04/07/2016. b. At the site, a two frame high tubular welded type mobile scaffold had a 3 plank working platform exposing employees to a 13.5 feet fall hazard, on or about 04/07/2016. |
|
| Citation ID |
01001B |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 G01 |
| Issuance Date |
2016-04-25 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2016-05-19 |
| Nr Instances |
2 |
| Nr Exposed |
2 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Employees on scaffolds more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level by fall protection established in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)-(vii) of this section: a. At the site, a two frame high tubular welded type scaffold was not provided with guardrails on all open sides of the working platform exposing employees to a 13 feet fall hazard, on or about 04/07/2016. b. At the site, a two frame high tubular welded type mobile scaffold was not provided with guardrails on all open sides of the working platform exposing employees to a 13.5 feet fall hazard, on or about 04/07/2016. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002A |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260451 E01 |
| Issuance Date |
2016-04-25 |
| Current Penalty |
1617.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
2310.0 |
| Final Order |
2016-05-19 |
| Nr Instances |
2 |
| Nr Exposed |
2 |
| Gravity |
1 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.451(e)(1): When scaffold platforms were more than 2 feet (0.6 m) above or below a point of access, portable ladders, hook-on ladders, attachable ladders, stair towers (scaffold stairways/towers), stairway-type ladders (such as ladder stands), ramps, walkways, integral prefabricated scaffold access, or direct access from other scaffold, structure, personnel hoist, or similar surface was not used: a. At the site, a two frame tubular welded frame scaffold was not provided with an access ladder to the working platform exposing employees to a 13 feet fall hazard, on or about 04/07/2016. b. At the site, a two frame tubular welded frame mobile scaffold was not provided with an access ladder to the working platform exposing employees to a 13.5 feet fall hazard, on or about 04/07/2016. |
|
| Citation ID |
01002B |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260452 W01 |
| Issuance Date |
2016-04-25 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2016-05-19 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
1 |
| Gravity |
1 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.452(w)(1): The mobile scaffold was not braced by cross, horizontal, or diagonal braces, or combination thereof, to prevent racking or collapse of the scaffold and secure vertical members together laterally so as to automatically square and align the vertical members: a. At the site, a two frame high tubular welded type mobile scaffold was not provided with a diagonal brace to maintain the working platform plumb and square, exposing employees to a 13.5 feet fall hazard, on or about 04/07/2016. |
|
|
|
341348118
|
0420600
|
2016-03-24
|
199 DALI BLVD SOUTH, SAINT PETERSBURG, FL, 33701
|
|
| Inspection Type |
Prog Related
|
| Scope |
Complete
|
| Safety/Health |
Safety
|
| Close Conference |
2016-03-24
|
| Emphasis |
L: FALL, P: FALL
|
| Case Closed |
2016-07-12
|
Related Activity
| Type |
Inspection |
| Activity Nr |
1134810 |
| Safety |
Yes |
|
Violation Items
| Citation ID |
01001A |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260501 B01 |
| Issuance Date |
2016-03-29 |
| Current Penalty |
2100.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
3500.0 |
| Final Order |
2016-04-22 |
| Nr Instances |
2 |
| Nr Exposed |
2 |
| Gravity |
5 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(1): Each employee on a walking/working surface with an unprotected side or edge which was 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above a lower level was not protected from falling by the use of guardrail systems, safety net systems, or personal fall arrest systems: a. At the south-west corner of the building, an employee was exposed to a 30 feet fall hazard while chipping concrete at the edge of the building, in that, the employee was not tied off while working at the edge of the fourth floor, on or about 03/24/2016. b. At the east side of the building on the fourth floor, an employee was removing railings without being tied off while in progress of concrete work, on or about 03/24/2016. |
|
| Citation ID |
01001B |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260502 B02 |
| Issuance Date |
2016-03-29 |
| Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
0.0 |
| Final Order |
2016-04-22 |
| Nr Instances |
13 |
| Nr Exposed |
20 |
| Gravity |
5 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.502(b)(2): Midrails, screens, mesh, intermediate vertical members, or equivalent intermediate structure members were not installed between the top edge of the guardrail system and the walking/working surface when there was no wall or parapet wall at least 21 inches (53 cm) high: a. At the fourth floor, employees were exposed to a 30 feet fall hazard, in that, 13 windows which were 10 inches from the floor were not provided with a midrail, on or about 03/24/2016. |
|
|
|
339543316
|
0420600
|
2014-01-07
|
1119 E. COLONIAL DR., ORLANDO, FL, 32817
|
|
| Inspection Type |
Planned
|
| Scope |
Partial
|
| Safety/Health |
Safety
|
| Close Conference |
2014-01-07
|
| Emphasis |
L: FALL, P: FALL
|
| Case Closed |
2015-03-23
|
Violation Items
| Citation ID |
01001 |
| Citaton Type |
Serious |
| Standard Cited |
19260501 B13 |
| Issuance Date |
2014-02-13 |
| Abatement Due Date |
2014-03-05 |
| Current Penalty |
1680.0 |
| Initial Penalty |
2800.0 |
| Final Order |
2015-03-23 |
| Nr Instances |
1 |
| Nr Exposed |
4 |
| Gravity |
10 |
| FTA Current Penalty |
0.0 |
| Citation text line |
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each employee(s) engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels were not protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system, nor were employee(s) provided with an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph 1926.501 (b): a) On or about 01/07/2014 on a house rooftop (8/12 slope) where aluminum siding was being installed, the use of fall protection, that is, lanyards and lifelines, was not enforced exposing employees to a 25 ft. fall hazard. |
|
|
